In case there was any confusion, the last 24 hours have shown us the US Senate race between Maria Cantwell and Mike McGavick is going to be heated.

For starters, yesterday McGavick's campaign blog responded to a snarky attack from Cantwell's counterpart. It's an attack in tone and content one expects to see from the state Democratic party (such as their lame anti-McGavick site), or the DSCC. The McGavick blog response speaks for itself though I'll add some more content for the interested reader on the three main topics of Social Security, the sales tax deduction, and abortion:

On Social Security, Cantwell's stance still hurts my head. On the deduction, Cantwell's team is beating into the ground a Seattle Times editorial that missed the mark on a McGavick campaign ad something fierce. On abortion (sigh), Cantwell's people seem to have missed Joel Connelly's column that discusses dynamics in the 2004 Dave Reichert v. Dave Ross race, noting that playing the same-old, tiresome abortion card in swing elections isn't terribly effective.

As to the coming campaign, it's a safe bet both sides will take some serious heat from the media. The PI ironically lands a one-two punch on Cantwell out of the gate today, noting she doesn't want to talk about issues with her opponent, and that she's really good at silencing the opposition at times as well.

Meanwhile, Mike McGavick came out swinging last night, with "civil" punches of course, on the issues that will be at the fore in the coming weeks. David Postman covers it, and here are the "notes" on McGavick's speech released to the media yesterday prior to the event:

- Civility in politics matters. Typical campaigns directly contribute to the failure of government to address and solve real problems.

- In the past two years alone, the U.S. Senate has failed to secure our borders and craft an immigration solution, failed to save Social Security, failed to lower the price of health care. The behavior practiced during typical campaigns is a direct cause of these continued failures.

- For example, anytime a politician suggests a plan to solve social security, it's used as fodder to convince seniors that their benefits will suddenly be at risk.

- Sen. Maria Cantwell and her allies are guilty of running this type of campaign - using typical attack-and-avoid tactics.

- Whether or not she publicly allows it to happen, Sen. Cantwell's allies will have consistent themes until Nov. 7: Impuning Mike's career at Safeco, insinuating Mike is lockstep with George Bush, and declaring Mike wants to privatize Social Security.

- Sen. Cantwell continues to avoid a call for many debates on the issues.

- Mike will maintain his pledge to run a civil campaign, but will continue to point out differences on issues - whether they are differences between Mike and Senator Cantwell, Mike and the majority of Congress, or Mike and the Bush Administration.

- There are stark differences between Mike and Sen. Cantwell. Just a few: Sen. Cantwell opposes and continues to oppose the tax cuts of the last few years that have generated over 5.5 million jobs. Mike knows those cuts have led to economic growth and would vote to extend them. While serving in the House, Sen. Cantwell voted for the highest tax increase in history. Mike would have opposed that increase. Sen. Cantwell has opposed permanent repeal of the death tax. Mike supports full repeal. Sen. Cantwell recently voted to continue giving illegal aliens Social Security benefits. Mike disagrees.

- Senator Cantwell's positions stand in contrast to what Mike believes and what he thinks is best for the country and for Washington. Each of these contrasting positions, and many others, will be highlighted in the coming weeks.

- You can't expect a different kind of politics by rewarding someone running a typical campaign. And you can't expect change if you send the same people back.

Direct and pointed talk on the issues is good. More please. And in the meantime, readers should be prepared for the intensity of this campaign to ramp up quickly.